A line-item veto won’t correct the mistakes of the 2025 budget, former administration officials say

By Kyle Aristophere T. Atienza, A reporter

PRESIDENT Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. may need to send the budget bill back to Congress as item-by-item vetoes would not be enough to cure mistakes made by a bicameral congressional committee, according to a panel of former administration officials and governance experts.

Mr. Marcos is expected to sign the proposed P6.352-trillion national budget for 2025 on Monday, after canceling its first session on December 20 amid legal questions and major cuts in social services funding.

“We are concerned that line-item vetoes will not be enough to address the critical issues embedded in next year’s budget,” said Transformation, and Excellence in Governance (INCITEGov) in a letter to Mr. Marcos, dated December 28.

The budgeting process may have violated constitutional principles of checks and balances, the group said, and it didn’t help that the budgeting and appropriations process by two congressional committees “was done with limited scrutiny.”

Bicameral members have gone through a “critical comprehensive review of this important legislation.”

Malacañang last week said the President is expected to veto other items in the budget bill amid the backlash caused by budget cuts for social services including education and the removal of government funding for the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth).

Mr. Marcos earlier vowed to restore the Department of Education’s (DepEd) proposed budget, especially the P10 billion funding for its 2025 computerization program but confirmed the return of PhilHealth despite concerns about its financial health, citing its finances.

INCITEGov urged Mr. Marcos to scrutinize the unplanned budgets and reconsider the alleged pork barrel items in the proposed budget.

It said several key infrastructure projects, including those on the Build Better More list, are inexplicably subject to unplanned funding, which could lead to “potential delays and inefficiencies” in project implementation.

Throughout this period, a large share of infrastructure items especially in the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) which is a “pig barrel by nature” has been prioritized, it added.

University of the Philippines Los Baños economics professor Enrico P. Villanueva earlier said that the big increase in the DPWH budget is highly questionable as only 11, or 6% of the government’s 186 infrastructure projects are expected to continue in 2025.

“With 186 projects costing P9.6 T(rillion) over several years, the extraordinary allocation of infra is questionable,” he said, noting that the DPWH’s share in the budget approved by Congress increased by P288 billion to P1.1- trillion of funds.

Only 51 projects are to be funded by the General Appropriations Act. Eighty-six will be funded through official development assistance, while 43 of them are under the community partnership program, he noted.

The statement was signed by top government officials, including former Budget Secretary Florencio B. Abad, former Education Secretary Edilberto C. De Jesus, former Higher Education Commission Chairman Patricia B. Licuanan, and former National Anti-Poverty Commission Director Philip Arnold Tuaño. .

INCITEGov urged the President and legislators to restore the money removed from important sectors such as health, education, agriculture, social protection, transport and climate change.

“These services are critical to the well-being of our most vulnerable citizens and the well-being of the nation.”

DepEd’s budget decreased by P11.56 billion to P737 billion, while that of the Department of Social Affairs and Community Development and the Department of Health decreased by P95 billion to P217.3-billion in funds and by P25.7 billion to P247 billion, respectively.

Meanwhile, the Action for Economic Reforms (AER) in a separate letter to the President focused on how the Executive Branch can cure the “unconstitutionality” of the PhilHealth allocation.

Mr. Marcos should prevent the allocation of funds against the law and the government’s financial system, including infrastructure projects that have not been properly assessed by the DPWH and those that are not yet ready for implementation, AER said.

“This will free up fiscal space, which may enable Congress to pass an additional budget as provided under Article VI, Section 25(3) of the Constitution,” he said.

SUPPLEMENTARY BUDGET
Passing a supplementary budget, which can be acted upon as soon as Congress reconvenes in January, can also cure the decrease in funding for basic social services such as education, the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), agriculture, transportation, and the calamity fund.

The budget approved by Congress violated the Universal Health Care Act (UHC) and the Sinful Tax Reform Acts, the AER said, as it cited legal precedent that states budget legislation cannot amend the law.

According to Section 11 of the UHC Act of 2019, PhilHealth’s total savings “shall not exceed a ceiling equal to the two-year estimated cost of the program.

If the actual reserves exceed the required limit at the end of the financial year, the excess money “will be used to increase the benefits of the plan and reduce the amount of contributions of the members,” it added.

The Sin Tax Act mandates the government to allocate 80% of revenue from tobacco products and sugary drinks to PhilHealth to fund the UHC program.

“We respectfully submit that this is against the constitution, as the existing law states that the appropriations law cannot amend the law,” AER told the President.

“In this case, it will amend at least three laws above, which cannot be done indirectly through the budget.”

The group also cited the United Nations International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights, to which the Philippines is a signatory, saying that it is also the State’s responsibility to provide premiums for the poor.

The agreement states that the State must use the maximum of available resources to realize the right to health.

AER said Article 15, Section XII, of the 1987 Constitution calls for “an integrated and comprehensive approach to health promotion that will endeavor to make essential goods, health and other social services available to all people at affordable costs.”

“We would also like to emphasize that it is a fair matter, Mr. President, that the government’s share of PhilHealth’s money for all indirect donors is allocated to PhilHealth as per the law,” said the group.

“The government should not leave the responsibility of financing PhilHealth to direct contributors (employees and self-paying members) and employers who bear part of the income of their employees,” it added.

The AER said the President’s exercise of his veto power and additional budget options will not delay the approval of the 2025 budget or jeopardize the revised budget.

“It will also return the initiative to Congress, which initially caused the problems the President is facing now.”